[dorlomin]

In Almost Every European Country, Bikes Are Outselling New Cars



Its not simply the economic crisis, the UK and Germany have done relatively well, have deeply entrenched car cultures but also younger generations take the environment much more seriously.

Europes big advantage is the age of it urban cores. Many large cities are medieval in origin (London, Frankfurt, Rome is a whole other level of age), while even relatively recent ones like Birmingham were largely built when the car was unknown. Cities built for horses and walking have an innate ability to re-urbanise. But sympathetic civil authorities also help. Proper cycle lanes encourage more timid cycle users, that add to the numbers increasing driving awareness, reducing risk. Virtuous circle.

[SeaGypsy]

[AgentR11]

I enjoy maps, so while some will sit and watch sit coms, I'll sit and browse google maps of different places. A thing of note about Europe isn't just the big city/facilities pushers; its also the more ancient characteristic of the distances between compact, distinct villages. Once someone realizes what they can actual do as an adult on a bicycle, the range of places one might use the bike to travel to greatly expands.

Contrast with the US where that distance is more on the order of 60+km and the villages, such as they are, are not compact, but scattershot in a general vicinity along a thoroughfare axis. I can do that 60km one way distance, but most folks don't want anything to do with 120km on a bike in a day....

[dolanbaker]

Please don't read too much into these figures, remember that the bicycle needs no license and has no age limits to ride.

I would guess that at least 50% of those bikes are bought for children and most of the others are in addition to a car rather than replacing a car.

[AgentR11]

I'm not big on the "replacing a car" concept. Bikes provide another means of covering travel miles. Replacing car-miles with bike-miles is a worthwhile goal, reducing car count, I just don't see it. I travel by bike alot, but I will always own two cars, or rather a passenger vehicle and a truck, because I periodically require them, and would use them, even if fuel were $20/gal. As a cyclist, I do like the way most of Western and Central Europe is laid out, makes me jealous a bit, though there is a lot to be said for our long distance/wide shoulder lane highways between some of our small cities.

[vision-master]

TX Bikers Run Off Road By Angry 74 yr Old lol

[Beery1]

Proper cycle lanes encourage more timid cycle users, that add to the numbers increasing driving awareness, reducing risk

Whether the installation of cycle lanes actually reduces risk is a controversial issue and it is by no means certain that it does. Studies, such as the recent one done in Washington DC, tend to suggest it does not.

2012 Kittleson & Associates Report (Washington DC)

http://ddot.dc.gov/DC/DDOT/Publication%20Files/On%20Your%20Street/Bicycles%20and%20Pedestrians/Bicycles/Bike%20Lanes/DDOT_BicycleFacilityEvaluation_ExecSummary.pdf

Report found:

Bike boxes, bicycle signals and sharrows were installed at the 6 leg intersection of New Hampshire Ave/16th St/U St NW.: after the installation, crashes increased from 4 in 4 years to 5 crashes in 13 months. Per month, that is the equivalent of more than 4 times the number of crashes. The report notes no increase in bicycle volumes.

Pennsylvania center cycletrack: after the installation, crashes increased from 9 in 4 years to 16 crashes in 14 months - six times more crashes per month. Taking into account the fact that bicycle volume tripled, crashes still increased by a factor of two.

15th St NW left side cycletrack: after installation, crashes increased from 20 in 4 years to 13 crashes in 14 months - over twice as many crashes per month. Taking into account the fact that cyclist volumes doubled, this represents an increase in crashes of 10%.

Strangely, despite these significant increases in crashes, the report states that the bicycle facilities "improved conditions for cycling". If this is an improvement, perhaps installing anti-personnel mines every few hundred yards or so might make a bigger 'improvement'.

What we have here is a report that ignores the bad and focuses on the good in cycling infrastructure. This is happening in almost all the reports produced because there is political pressure to install bike facilities no matter how dangerous they actually are. But the numbers don't lie - anyone can look at these reports and do a little simple math, but most don't bother. Cyclists are being sold a bill of goods when they blindly accept that bike lanes, paths and tracks enhance safety.

Cycling is a very safe activity, wherever one does it, but studies suggest it's safest to cycle on the road, where cyclists have a whole traffic lane to control and where they are most visible to other road users. I feel cyclists are making a grave error by surrendering the road to motorists. See this video for some examples of where we might be headed:

https://vimeo.com/77882260#at=0

The dirty little secret of Dutch bike culture is that cyclists are very much second-class citizens, classed as a sort of glorified pedestrian with no equal right to the road, forced by law to use bike facilities and banned from many roads. Although Dutch ride share figures put cycling at about 40% of trips, cyclists get less than 25% of any given roadway and often bike lanes and paths are very poor and very congested. Also, crash and injury rates for cyclists are far higher than the road use figures might make one suspect. So the Dutch cycling utopia that many proclaim starts to look a little less appealing when we look a little deeper.

As for 'proper' bicycle lanes, what is that? Here in the USA, there are no set standards or legal requirements for bike facilities - no safety review processes such as those that roads are subject to. I fear we cyclists are being fooled into accepting a second-rate place to operate our vehicles by the motoring lobby (and others) who just want us off what they consider to be 'their' roads.

As for me, I've received training by the League of American Bicyclists as a cycling safety instructor. This training allows me to see safety issues that many cyclists miss. Also, I've been riding in the roadway and sharing it with all kinds of vehicles for 40 years. I see no reason to give up my place on the road in favor of a narrow track or lane that, in practice, is often poorly designed or poorly installed. Door zone bike lanes are almost ubiquitous in the US and they result in numerous cyclist deaths every year. I'm fine with infrastructure if it's done right, but I have yet to see a specialized bike facility in the US that I would feel was safer than the road. The road may be scary, but it's not as dangerous as some novice cyclists seem to believe. Bike facilities, as they are currently designed and implemented, are almost certainly less safe.

[vision-master]

Cycling is a very safe activity, wherever one does it, but studies suggest it's safest to cycle on the road, where cyclists have a whole traffic lane to control

Not in the USA......

[AgentR11]

TX Bikers Run Off Road By Angry 74 yr Old

You do realize on that same day dozens of cars were "run off the road by angry xyz" right??? Its just not news. The bike one honestly makes news and gets attention because there is a small subset of folks (admittedly including myself) who can be relied upon to click articles, click comments, and watch videos, in other words, I'm being a sucker and allowing them to pitch me more soap.

In the end, traveling is not "safe" and never has been; but its safe enough, whether by car, or bike, or on foot. Unless you are drunk, or out at night without lights.

edit: bad sentence structure. I blame the last nights wine, it was delicious, and so good with the steak, but the goblet kept getting refilled................

[vision-master]

Cycling is dangerous on big city streets, not safe.

[AgentR11]

Cycling is a very safe activity, wherever one does it, but studies suggest it's safest to cycle on the road, where cyclists have a whole traffic lane to control

Not in the USA......

To be fair, its a true statement, its just kinda silly. The USA's general right hand side of the lane for bikes works fine; a lot better than most bike lanes, or specialty facility markings. The other side of the argument does have a point that it makes the uninitiated THINK they are safer, and thus encourages them to make that first ride to somewhere useful.

There's some worthwhile quibling to be done, I think our lighting requirements for road bikes is much to low, and filtering up at stop lights really doesn't work well safety wise, puts the whole lane of traffic in a weird starting configuration. I never have any trouble with cars by taking and holding a position in queue, it just seems more mutually respectful; filtering feels like "special snowflake/cutting in line" behavior. Some better enforcement of actual illegal biking behavior would also be a good thing, particularly wrong way and center lane riding.

[AgentR11]

Cycling is dangerous on big city streets, not safe.

Big city streets are the safest place to cycle for purpose at speed.

The almost worst, are small subdivision streets with poor line of sight.
The absolute worst are bike/ped shared paths with driveway crossings.

I have many thousands of road miles in the US on my bike, commuting and utility, and that is my experience.

nb... I'm not talking about kids in the park, or mom on her trendy fixie meandering about at 5mph. That's a completely different kettle of fish.

[Beery1]

Cycling is a very safe activity, wherever one does it, but studies suggest it's safest to cycle on the road, where cyclists have a whole traffic lane to control

Not in the USA......

Yes, in the USA. Look at your state's cycling laws. Chances are, you do not live in one of the few states that prevent cyclists from controlling the lane when it's too narrow to share.

In almost every state in the US, cyclists are allowed to take a controlling position in the lane in a number of very common circumstances - the most common of which being when the lane is too narrow for a cyclist and another vehicle to safely travel side-by-side within the lane. Virtually no lane in the US is wide enough to share. The vast majority are the standard 11ft (and many don't even meet this width), while even a wide outside 14ft lane only barely allows the 3ft passing clearance that is required by law in a growing number of states - and only then if the measurement is taken from the edge of the useable roadway - often substandard curb-to-curb measurements are given a pass.

[Beery1]

Some better enforcement of actual illegal biking behavior would also be a good thing, particularly wrong way and center lane riding.

Center lane riding is not illegal, for the reasons I explained above. The requirement to ride on the right side of the lane only applies if you are traveling slower than other traffic, and only if certain other rare conditions are met. The law in your state of Texas states:

"Sec. 551.103. Operation on Roadway.

(a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, unless:

(1) the person is passing another vehicle moving in the same direction; [or]

(2) the person is preparing to turn left at an intersection or onto a private road or driveway; [or]

(3) a condition on or of the roadway, including a fixed or moving object, parked or moving vehicle, pedestrian, animal, or surface hazard prevents the person from safely riding next to the right curb or edge of the roadway; or

(4) the person is operating a bicycle in an outside lane that is:
(A) less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that lane; or

(B) too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side."

Also, the center of the traffic lane is usually the safest place to ride a bike. The closer the cyclist is to the curb, the less visible and the less safe he is.

[AgentR11]

I love where I live. Wide road lanes or wide shoulders all over the place. I honestly feel fine with 2ft margins though. I do take a lane position on the few skinny roads here, but no one cares because the reason they haven't been paved wide is because the traffic volume is extremely low on them, thus, I can't remember a time where anyone had to do anything other than a regular, full speed, lane change pass with no hesitation.

From my recollection, New England has less road space, along with a weird take on traffic calming that involves narrow lanes... *shudder*...

on center lane.. I'm pretty sure any through travel on our center lanes is illegal in Texas, regardless of vehicle type. (center lane is what we call the suicide lane, left turn only marked, but without traffic control partitions.)

[Beery1]

Not sure what you mean by 'center lane' travel then? Are we perhaps talking two different issues?

Oh, you mean THAT center lane. Yeah, that is dangerous. Dangerous for cars too. I don't know why DoT allows them.

[Beery1]

Cycling is dangerous on big city streets, not safe.

Spoken by someone who either doesn't cycle, or cycles very rarely. My entire life has been spent cycling on big city streets. I have not had a collision or even a fall on any street since I was 8 - and that was because I was doing something incredibly stupid.

Cycling is a very safe activity - studies show it to be twice as safe as motoring. The idea that it's "dangerous" anywhere is simply nonsense. Sure, people get killed while cycling - people get killed getting out of the shower, making toast, climbing stairs - that doesn't mean these activities are dangerous.

[Beery1]

...I do take a lane position on the few skinny roads here, but no one cares because the reason they haven't been paved wide is because the traffic volume is extremely low on them, thus, I can't remember a time where anyone had to do anything other than a regular, full speed, lane change pass with no hesitation...

You might enjoy my blog:

http://ianbrettcooper.blogspot.com/

Speaking of "a regular, full speed, lane change pass with no hesitation":

http://ianbrettcooper.blogspot.com/2013/10/thought-for-day.html

I'm in Maryland, but I try to make my posts relate to cycling issues nationwide.

[vision-master]

Cycling is dangerous on big city streets, not safe.

Spoken by someone who either doesn't cycle, or cycles very rarely. My entire life has been spent cycling on big city streets. I have not had a collision or even a fall on any street since I was 8 - and that was because I was doing something incredibly stupid.

Cycling is a very safe activity - studies show it to be twice as safe as motoring. The idea that it's "dangerous" anywhere is simply nonsense. Sure, people get killed while cycling - people get killed getting out of the shower, making toast, climbing stairs - that doesn't mean these activities are dangerous.

You do not LIVE IN THE US of A.....

FYI: Berry, I own 4 MTB's and 2 Roadie bikes.

1999 - man in blue.....

[AgentR11]

Yes, we know you like to buy stuff.